Understanding the Baptism of the Holy Spirit - by Dave Jenkins

Found here. Our comments in bold.

-----------------------------

The author is focused on refuting the Pentecostal doctrine of the baptism of the Holy Spirit is the second blessing. We agree with him on this point, but he misses that being filled with the Spirit is the actual second blessing.

In a sense it's a matter of semantics. Pentecostals use the wrong descriptor for the second blessing, but non-Pentecostals use the wrong blessing for the right descriptor. 

Though the author biblically documents many of his assertions, the key conclusion he offers, that every Christian has the Holy Spirit and thus should not seek a second blessing, is not documented.

We have commented on some of the other writings of this author, and frankly, the below explanation is much better than others we have previously examined.

----------------------------------

As we look at the 20th century it is hard to deny the influence of the movement that began in large part at the Azuza Street Revival and quickly blossomed into the charismatic and Pentecostal movement. With that movement has come discussion on the presence and power of the Holy Spirit, both in popular and academic works, along with the claims of Pentecostal theology that the sign-gifts of healing, prophecy, and speaking in tongues are for today. (There are no such things as sign gifts.)

The focus of this article and this issue of Theology for Life is not on the question of whether the sign-gifts are for today or not. The question before us in this article is, “What is the baptism of the Holy Spirit?”

The idea behind the baptism of the Holy Spirit is the claim by Pentecostal and charismatic theologians that believers receive a second work of the Spirit after conversion. Now, the true Christian—at the moment of conversion—is sealed by the Spirit (True.)

and given gifts to use for the glory of God. (False. God gives gifts any time He wants, not just at conversion. And we can eagerly desire gifts as well [1Co. 14:1], which certainly suggests that gifts can be given well after conversion.)

The “baptism” of the Spirit, according to what the Pentecostal denominations teach, is that one can be a believer without having the Spirit, (False.)

or at least without having Him in all of His fullness. (True. This, in fact, is the situation most Christians are in.)

And thus, according to their teachings, the believer must pray to receive the Holy Spirit and/or His “second blessing” of spiritual gifts. (These are two separate things, both of which are imprecisely phrased. The Pentecostal "second blessing" is not to receive the Holy Spirit, nor is it to receive unspecified spiritual gifts. Rather, the belief is regarding receiving what they call "the baptism of the Holy Spirit, as evidenced by speaking in tongues," where Christians seek and receive more of the Holy Spirit and subsequently speak in tongues as a demonstration of this. 

Now, we should say that we think Pentecostals are wrong. The evidence of tongues is not biblically required. However, being filled with the Holy Spirit [Ep. 5:18] is certainly something we should seek. The author will in fact later concede that we should seek to be filled with Holy Spirit.)

Now, the belief in the “second work of the Spirit” comes mostly from anecdotal (or personal) experience and some from the Book of Acts. (Isn't getting filled with the Spirit necessarily a second work?)

As some people read Acts, they see that God promised to send the Holy Spirit upon the Apostles who were already Christians (Acts 1:1-11). So, they read of the Spirit’s outpouring of the gift of tongues that occurred on that first Pentecost (post Christ’s ascension, in Acts 2:1-3) and conclude that this sequence of events demonstrates that the “second baptism” of the Spirit is normative for Christians throughout the Church (and all of Church history). (Well, what does the Book of Acts tell us? Peter explained to the assembled crowd exactly the reasons for what had just occurred: 

Ac. 2:17-18 "In the last days," God says, "I will pour out my Spirit on all people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your young men will see visions, your old men will dream dreams. 18 Even on my servants, both men and women, I will pour out my Spirit in those days, and they will prophesy..."

So tell us, Mr. Jenkins. Is this outpouring limited, or is it normative?)

Additionally, the book of Acts records some believers as receiving the Holy Spirit after having been disciples for some time (Acts 19:1-7). This is also is taken by Pentecostals as evidence for a post-conversion “baptism of the Spirit”, in which the laying on of hands and prayer for the Holy Spirit to fill a believer is a requirement. The central issue that causes concern is whether this experience or teaching is biblically faithful and theologically accurate. (Yes, indeed. Please explain.)

What we can state at the outset is that all of our teachings and doctrines must be first and foremost grounded in and shaped by the Word, not primarily feelings or emotions. Human beings often deceive themselves (Jeremiah 17:9), so we need to be Bereans (Acts 17:11) and test all things by the Word (1 Thessalonians 5:21). (Yes, of course. No one disagrees.)

Earlier, I mentioned how Pentecostals perceive the baptism of the Holy Spirit from certain texts in the book of Acts. To those in this denomination, these texts seem to indicate that some disciples did not receive the indwelling and empowering of the Holy Spirit until sometime much later after conversion. Acts 2 is one text where we see the Holy Spirit coming upon the disciples after they had been following Jesus. In Acts 19:1-7, (Let's quote it, since the author seems reluctant: 

Ac. 19:2-4 “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” They answered, “No, we have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit.” 3 So Paul asked, “Then what baptism did you receive?” “John’s baptism,” they replied. 4 Paul said, “John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. He told the people to believe in the one coming after him, that is, in Jesus.”

With the pertinent part of the text before us, let's see what the author has to say.)

we read of people in Ephesus who had been disciples for a while without having received the Holy Spirit. According to the text, they had never even heard of the Holy Spirit. It’s possible that they, being a distance from Jerusalem, had not yet heard of Christ’s death, burial, resurrection, and ascension, and were merely disciples of Christ’s rabbinical teachings, therefore they needed to hear the rest of the good news and believe. (Well, the text tells us that they had believed [vs. 2]. They had incomplete knowledge, but one does not need complete knowledge to be saved. They were clearly saved.

More to the point, why does this story appear in the narrative? This is an important thing to consider. Let's look at that.

The first time the Holy Spirit came after Pentecost is in Acts 8, where Philip went to Samaria to preach the Gospel [vs. 5]. He did many miracles there [vs. 6]. Then, when the apostles in Jerusalem heard about the Samaritans getting saved they had to see for themselves [Vs. 14]. How was it possible that the Samaritans could be saved? A Jew could not conceive of such a thing.

But here it was, right before their eyes. So Peter and John prayed for them to receive the Holy Spirit. Why? Not because Philip was incapable. The apostles had come to see for themselves, and by their hand the gentiles received the fullness of the promise. They needed to know and understand that salvation had come to the gentiles. That's the whole purpose of the story. 

But interestingly, tongues are not mentioned.

The second incident is in Acts 10, where because of a vision Cornelius sent for Peter. Peter had his famous vision of a sheet descending from heaven. So Peter agreed to go, even though as a Jew he was not permitted to associate with gentiles [vs. 28]. 

Peter was a hard case in this regard. In fact, it took several incidents [including a rebuke from Paul, Gal. 2:11-14] for him to finally come to grips with the fact that salvation is also for the gentiles. But the incident in Acts 10 was antecedent to Paul's rebuke. Peter was still learning the magnitude of salvation at this point, reluctantly it seems.

When he reported back to the Jerusalem church that the Holy Spirit with tongues came to these gentiles [10:46] he was criticized by the Jewish believers for his contact with the gentiles [Ac. 11:3-4]. He responded to them: 

Ac. 11:15 As I began to speak, the Holy Spirit came on them as he had come on us at the beginning.

Notice that Peter appealed to what happened at Pentecost to describe what happened to gentiles! So we can start to see that these events are coming together as a narrative. 

We have arrived at the Acts 19 incident. In this context we can see that there's an escalation of evidence the Holy Spirit was providing to the apostles. Now the gentiles had received the Holy Spirit with both tongues and prophecy [vs. 6]. Imagine the reaction of the apostles when the very word of God was coming from the mouths of gentiles!

This had to be earth-shaking to them.

Based on this we can see that the tongues of the book of Acts are specifically a sign to the apostles regarding the salvation of the gentiles, not for evidence of the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Why? Simple. The tongues of Acts did not require interpretation, while the tongues of 1 Corinthians does. The tongues of acts were not the spiritual gift, and therefore are not indicative of either the author's doctrine or Pentecostal doctrine. And lastly, the tongues of Acts did not manifest in the assembly of the saints.)

However, when taking the narrative in Acts and seeking to make it normative for every Christian, can lead to error. (We completely agree, but for different reasons.)

The history recorded within the Book of Acts details a time in Church history that was foundational to the start of the global Church body, with many events never recurring again (Ephesians 2:19-22). Jesus’ own words in Acts 1:8 explain that the disciples (Christians) will receive power from the Holy Spirit to take the gospel to the end of the earth. So, if we follow how people are saved and indwelt by the Spirit in Acts, we see that they follow the geographical sequence described in Acts 1:8. Baptisms occur in Jerusalem/Judea (Acts 2; 10), Samaria (Acts 8:14-17), and Ephesus (the ends of the earth; Acts 19:1-7). This confirms that the gospel would go to the areas Jesus describes in Acts 1:8. Spirit baptisms were evidence to the Early Church that the gospel would go forward, and not meant to be example of the normative Christian experience. (??? "Spirit baptisms" are not available to us? This is a substantial claim, but the author's documentation suddenly disappears. Let's help him out of his misconception: 

1Co. 12:7 Now to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good.

A manifestation is showing forth, something hidden brought into plain view. Like the tongues of Acts, the spiritual gifts are manifestions of the Holy Spirit, albeit for a very different purpose. These manifestations are grace allocations [Ep. 4:7] by the Spirit [1Co. 12:11] and therefore are not indicators of spiritual status. They are gifts after all, given to edify the Body.

Then Paul seals this situation by describing source of the manifestations of the Spirit as baptism: 

1Co. 12:13 For we were all baptized by one Spirit into one body — whether Jews or Greeks, slave or free — and we were all given the one Spirit to drink.

Hmm. It seems clear from this verse that salvation is at the baptism of the Spirit. We thus conclude that both Pentecostals and the author have it wrong.)

Please allow me to add some clarity to my first point about Spirit baptism. When the Apostles addressed Spirit baptism in the Epistles, it is describing as a universal experience and not one that only certain believers enjoy (or would receive a “second blessing” or second outpouring of), as if they are “super Christians”. Paul states in 1 Corinthians 12:13 that every Christian is baptized into one Spirit and into one Body (i.e., the Body of Christ). So, Paul knows of no group of Christians who have not been filled with the Holy Spirit. (This is so nakedly false, especially since the author will quote Ephesians 5:18 below, as we previously mentioned.)

One of the main arguments against the idea of a second blessing of the Holy Spirit is the idea of a “Christian caste system”, by which one divides local churches into those who “have the Spirit” versus “those who do not”. (This is not a biblical argument.)

This idea, however, separates what the Lord has united, leading to a lot of issues including disunity in the body and a superiority mindset in some Christians, which is contrary to how Christians are to regard themselves (Philippians 2:5-11). (Pentecostals reject the idea that they are superior.)

Since all Christians are united to the Lord Jesus Christ, they are His, and He is theirs. Every Christian has the Holy Spirit, which means no Christian needs a special experience as touted by the concept of the “second blessing of the Spirit”. (Yes, every Christian has the Holy Spirit. But the author merely asserts without evidence that more of the Holy Spirit is not available. This is false:

Lk. 11:13 If you then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!

The author has repeatedly articulated his belief, but has not documented it.)

For the Christian, the baptism of the Holy Spirit occurs at conversion (1 Corinthians 6:19; 12:13). The baptism of the Spirit is not necessarily accompanied by the gift of tongues, and it would be fair to say that most Christians don’t speak in tongues when they receive Christ. The word baptism means “to dip in or immerse”. When Christians receive Christ, they are immersed (baptized) fully by the Holy Spirit into Christ and into the family of God (Romans 6:1-10).

The baptism of the Holy Spirit is received by faith in Christ alone. Baptism follows automatically salvation, placing Christians in Christ and sealing them permanently into the family of God, which is Paul’s point in Colossians 2:12. The new Christian is now in Christ. The baptism in the Spirit is permanent and is bestowed at conversion, never to be repeated (Acts 2:38). (Actually, all good on these claims, until....)

There is no biblical text that suggests that Christians are to seek a “second blessing” of the Holy Spirit, because they already have the full/complete blessing of the Holy Spirit, received at the time of their conversion. (...He repeats his undocumented [and false] claim.)

What we know about the baptism of the Holy Spirit is that the Spirit of God places the Christian in Christ and into union with other believers at the moment of salvation. John the Baptist predicted the baptism of the Holy Spirit (Mark 1:8). In fact, Jesus Himself predicted the baptism of the Holy Spirit before He ascended into heaven (Acts 1:5). The promise of the baptism of the Holy Spirit was fulfilled on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-4), and for the first time in redemptive history, people were permanently indwelt by the Spirit when the Church began. (Again the author returns to what are correct and documented assertions.)

One text that is central in this discussion on the baptism of the Holy Spirit is 1 Corinthians 12:12-13:

“For just as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though many, are one body, so it is with Christ. For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—Jews or Greeks, slaves or free—and all were made to drink of one Spirit.”

Notice how Paul says “we were all baptized” by the Spirit—all believers have received the baptism, synonymous with salvation, so it is not a special experience for only a few. (No one has claimed this.

But notice that the author divorces this verse [which we quoted above] from its context, that being the manifestions of the Spirit via the spiritual gifts, which we can eagerly desire. Thus the author appeals to a verse found in a passage that refutes his position.)

While Romans 6:1-4 does not mention the Holy Spirit, it is describing the Christians position before God. So, we can say that 1 Corinthians 12:13 states that every Christian has been baptized, just as they have been given the indwelling of the Spirit. What this means is that nowhere in Scripture are Christians told to be baptized with, in, or by the Spirit, or to seek the baptism of the Holy Spirit. (This of course is true, but it seems the author is laboring with nomenclature. The baptism of the Holy Spirit is correctly described as the moment of salvation, incorrectly described by Pentecostals as the second blessing, but this does not mean there is no second blessing simply because Pentecostals call it the wrong name.)

Also, Ephesians 4:5 refers to Spirit baptism, which is the reality for every Christian, just as “one faith” and “one Father” are likewise.

Scripture does, however, teach Christians to seek to be filled with the Spirit in Ephesians 5:18 which says, “Do not get drunk on wine … Instead, be filled with the Spirit.” The idea behind “be filled” is one of “keep on being filled” with the Holy Spirit. The filling of the Holy Spirit is not permanent like our baptism into the Spirit at conversion, but it (the filling of the Spirit) is to be repeated, again and again. The true Christian is to live a life submitted to the Lordship of Christ, and as such be saturated by and living under the influence of the Holy Spirit. (Well, how about that. The author correctly describes the continual need to be filled with the Holy Spirit, but is unable to make the obvious connection that this is the second blessing [or third, fourth, etc.].)

In summary, we can know two things about the baptism of the Holy Spirit. The first is that the Spirit joins the Christian to the body of Christ and brings us to new life in the Lord. Being in the Lord means we are risen with Christ to newness of life (Romans 6:4). Every Christian should exercise their spiritual gifts to keep the body functioning properly (1 Corinthians 12:13). Experiencing the one Spirit baptism serves as the basis for keeping unity in the Church (Ephesians 4:5). Secondly, being associated with Christ in His death, burial, and resurrection through Spirit baptism establishes the basis for the Christian’s separation from the power of indwelling sin and his/her walking in newness of life (Romans 6:1-10; Colossians 2:12).